Posted
by
Soulskillon Saturday May 10, 2014 @10:28AM
from the standards-change dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Nintendo has been taking heat recently for their decision not to allow same sex relationships in Tomodachi Life, an upcoming life simulation game for the 3DS. An advocacy group for LGBT issues said, 'In purposefully limiting players' relationship options, Nintendo is not only sending a hurtful message to many of its fans and consumers by excluding them, but also setting itself way behind the times.' The group also pointed out that The Sims allowed such choices over a decade ago. Nintendo originally replied that the game was not intended to be social commentary, and pointed out that the U.S. release of Tomodachi Life is just a localization of the Japanese version (gay marriage is not legal in Japan). Now Nintendo has officially apologized for 'failing to include same-sex relationships' in the game, and they promised to build a more inclusive experience if they make a sequel."

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..? I dunno about that. What's next? Is the LGBT community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?

Besides, no one complained about Harvest Moon, another game that only permits heterosexual marriages. So what! It's a game!

Not that I completely disagree, but if you're going to make a 'life simulation' game localized to a given market, then it's not all that far-fetched to make it reflect the (aggregate) society of that localization, or accept that you'll get complaints if you don't.

Ultimately Nintendo's solution is to say "we'll look at it IF we make a sequel" - it's not much of a commitment, more of a PR strategy.

I completely support the right of gays to marry (to the extent that I support any marriage, an institution I wholly reject, as does my long-term partner). But this amounts to a purely manufactured controversy. The game contains what it contains; don't like it? Don't play it. Send a message with your wallet, rather than pissing and moaning about a game you didn't create not behaving like you want it to.

Mass Effect and Dragon Age both had same-sex relationship options, and both were available on Xbox and Playstation, so those platforms certainly don't restrict that from appearing on there. Not sure about Nintento and iOS, but I doubt they'd ban the concept on the entire platform.

Besides - the whole thing has gotten a bit silly lately anyways. Dragon Age 2 not only allowed same-sex relationships, but made it so that EVERY character capable of starting a romance could enter into a relationship with your character regardless of your gender. That effectively removes heterosexuality from the game and renders everyone bisexual, which is in no way realistic.

Several of the recent Harvest Moon games, which do appear on Nintendo platforms, allow for same-sex marriages. You can even get children in them too, via adoption or babies showing up on your doorstep (I think).

PC is not monopolized. Nobody restricts what desktop applications you can install on a Windows box. Nor is Android. Nobody restricts what APKs you can adb install. It's pretty much Apple, Nintendo, PlayStation, and Xbox that still have lockouts, although some Slashdot regulars with alliterative nicks would be quick to defend the perceived value to end users of Apple's and Sony's lockouts.

Exactly, Im shocked that no one has started a kickstarter campaign to create a game that makes them (or any group that feels under represented) happy. If the outrage is legit and not just faux outrage, the campaign should succeed

Even with a Kickstarter campaign, how would such people come up with the "relevant game industry experience", "stable business organization", and "list of published game titles" that Nintendo expects [warioworld.com]?

Who brought up Wii? The article states that the game in question is made for Nintendo 2DS and 3DS. The big advantages of the 2DS and 3DS over (say) Android are 1. the centralized avatar builder, which this game uses, and 2. the discrete directional controls and trigger buttons without having to buy a MOGA clip-on gamepad that I haven't actually seen anyone use. The disadvantage is Nintendo's bias against first-timers.

on the other hand im sure that if there is a TRUE demand for such a game, android and IOS would work out just fine, and you have the added bonus of the fact that more people have IOS android than they do all consoles combine.

However, "reflect the (aggregate) society of that localization". What society are you living in where you can legally marry animals and/or power tools, and are either of those characters that you [i]can[/i] play as in the first place?

The game contains what it contains; don't like it? Don't play it. Send a message with your wallet, rather than pissing and moaning about a game you didn't create not behaving like you want it to.How about I do both?

Which is totally sound reasoning, if you would like to make the assertion that "LGBT people", "black people", and "animals" are all proper subsets of the group "people". Or, alternatively, that "LGBT people", "black people", and "animals" are all not subsets of the group "people". Which one of those arguments did you want to plant your flag on?

Don't play it. Send a message with your wallet, rather than pissing and moaning about a game you didn't create not behaving like you want it to.

Welcome to America, where we have now passed through the stage where money is equivalent to speech and reached the point where money is the only socially-acceptable form of speech.

Don't like what other people are saying about the game, pla? Guess you should stop pissing and moaning about it, and just not give any money to the people whose behaviour you disagree with. You know--follow your own advice.

I see in hindsight how folks could take my point the wrong way. I actually just meant "X are not subsets of the features of this game", trying to stay on the original topic as much as possible. I could (and perhaps should) also have used "shooting Nazi zombies" and "intergalactic trade missions" to express my point, though I don't feel those would have come across quite so sharply (for good or for bad).

Which is totally sound reasoning, if you would like to make the assertion that "LGBT people", "black people", and "animals" are all proper subsets of the group "people". Or, alternatively, that "LGBT people", "black people", and "animals" are all not subsets of the group "people". Which one of those arguments did you want to plant your flag on?

I'm not the OP, but I'll bite. Why don't you read it with s/LGBT/polygamists/ or s/LGBT/pedophiles/? Regardless of the manufactured controversy over a stupid kids Nintendo game, there will always be someone's morality and outrage somewhere being stepped on "because they weren't included". And if everyone's faux outrage over homosexuals doesn't extend to consenting polygamists, what kind of fucking hypocrites are they really being?

The problem your argument faces is that age-based consent is purely a legal fiction based on the culture the people are part of. Just as the culture was mostly against homosexuality but now accepts it, the same could happen with pedophilia. If it does, you would come across as bigoted for your stance against it.

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..? I dunno about that. What's next? Is the LGBT community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?

Now read that with s/LGBT/animals/.

Now read that with s/LGBT/power tools/.

I completely support the right of gays to marry (to the extent that I support any marriage, an institution I wholly reject, as does my long-term partner). But this amounts to a purely manufactured controversy. The game contains what it contains; don't like it? Don't play it. Send a message with your wallet, rather than pissing and moaning about a game you didn't create not behaving like you want it to.

Ehm, there are Disney movies about animals and power tools, you know?

And they were not made because someone cried "Is the power tools community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?" Mostly because they can not speak. Except in Disney movies. Where we empathize with them. Like with humans irregardless of race, sexual orientation and use of the word irregardless...

That's part of the 'invisible hand of the market'. If I don't like the fact that you're pissing on my color/orientation/clothing style, I can refuse to do business with you and discourage my friends from doing so.

It's called 'leverage'. If you don't like it, you don't have to participate in the marketplace. ---- "rather than pissing and moaning about" people talking to their friends.

PR for who and what though? I don't know this game, but seriously doubt large differences with other Nintendo games. Characters are usually displayed as asexual, or at least you can make the male characters look very feminine. Since this is imagination based, I really don't see a huge LGBT issue. Can't someone make character look feminine and name the character "Rie" or something so that their imagination can make it appear to be a same sex marriage?

Just to address this bit - I meant specifically as a defense strategy, as Nintendo had been painted negatively in the news, especially after their first response's gaffe;http://abcnews.go.com/Entertai... [go.com]

( As opposed to saying "you're right, that is a bit odd isn't it? we'll make a patch available in the coming weeks." or sticking to the "the game is what it is and the code and content simply doesn't allow for gay marriages - don't like it? don't play it." (paraphrased) )

It did cause a lot of controversy at the time. Among my very few contacts from so long ago, the universal agreement is that Nichelle Nichols was, and remains, a stunning woman woman whom any of us would be proud to have kissed at any point in her career.

What about adoption? Children without marriage? Poly-amorous relationships? Common enough in my area that no one blinks an eye, and yet they're not in the game.

Let's face it - Tomodachi Life is the Tamagotchi of sims. Dead simple, based on really simple rules, and with little actual simulation of anything. So gay relationships - yeah, I'm not surprised they were left out.

Personally, I think the biggest mistake by Nintendo was to use Miis instead of other, customizable avatars. At that point, you're waiting

What about adoption? Children without marriage? Poly-amorous relationships? Common enough in my area that no one blinks an eye, and yet they're not in the game.

Yes, but then you're actually arguing my point for me. Marriage is in the game. It's just that there's a check in the code that says "if (MiiA.gender == m && MiiB.gender == f) { okiedoke; }" which quite actively blocks two male or two female Miis from marrying each other.

Unless, of course, you view 'gay marriage' as distinctly different fro

Well, there are people in the game. Male and female. Yet there are also people who are neither male or female such as yours truly. Are we intersex people represented in this game or games in general? Movies? Media? No way.

Yet we're not complaining about most of society not even being aware or caring about our existence. Not too much at least. I'd definitely call the complaints about this Nintendo game asinine as there are countless other games where one could complain about in the same manner, but what it

Well, I agree that whatever relationship people have with their right/left hand is none of our business either, I'm not sure that's quite as apt an analogy.

Maybe if a Mii can be specified to be left-/right-handed, and then only right-handed Miis can marry, I can see some points being raised by interdextrous marriage proponents and angry internet letters being written about homodextrophobia.

It's entertainment.Entertainment in a large fashion dictates what is ok and normal.Every bit of acceptance is good.

This is also the matter of people noticing that a feature is lacking in their game.It's the same type of complaint, in a fashion, as when you can't play games in a LAN unless you are connected to the internet.It's an unneccesary addition specifically not allowing two people to get together.

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..? I dunno about that. What's next? Is the LGBT community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?

No... but they might start demanding that CEOs be fired for small private contributions to a campaign whose message is contrary to their opinion about how marriage should be redefined...

These are just avatars in a game. Someone actively decided that certain rules would apply to their interactions - there was no necessity to impose any societal values on those interactions, players would simply have applied those values they felt appropriate for themselves. In other words, the developers decided to impose their own vision of societal norms when there was no real need to do so.

This is a very similar issue to the "emoji racism" campaign - someone actively designed the almost-exclusively-white

There's a couple of things to point out here. One significant point is that the game works with the player's personal avatars, called mii's. The very point of the mii avatar is that it's supposed to represent you as a person. By creating a "life simulator" for those mii avatars, they should really have known to include the game features that people find important to them. Also, even if gay marriage isn't legal in Japan, it's not like the game is not allowed to depict it, nor does it mean there aren't ga

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..?

You're talking like this is a small thing, like the game didn't include their exact hair color or that one shirt they like to wear. People were upset because Nintendo was pretending that their relationship with their spouse did not and could not exist. That's not a small thing in a "life simulator", nor is it an attitude that's limited to games. And when Nintendo was called on it, they tried to dodge the issue rather than confronting it.

A better question is, what about this bothers you so much? Regardless of what kind of product it is, customers (potential and actual) have every right to criticize it. This is core game functionality. What's wrong with talking about it?

What's next? Is the LGBT community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?

I'm not sure what you're exactly trying to say with that, but Disney might be a bit ahead of you [thatguywit...lasses.com] there.

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..? I dunno about that.

Of course you don't. You're well represented. Now imagine you're a 14-year old suddenly realizing that you're different from 90% of the rest of the culture. And that there still exists taboos telling you that *how you are* is somehow wrong. In fact there is an entire section of the population telling you that you are immoral through no fault of your own. In fact there's a very real fear that you could be disappointing your family if you admit it to them.

They HAD to program that test, excluding same-sex marriages, because such marriages are illegal in Japan (and in many countries).

Allowing it would have have to be on a country basis... and that'd have required much more work than a single test. Don't forget that english-localized games are send in many more countries than only USA.

And I don't even talk about the nightmare if the two protagonist don't live in the same country and are playing through internet, one in a country where same-sex marriage is allowed and one where it's illegal.

Nintendo choice was the one requiring the less work and presenting the less legal risk.

They HAD to program that test, excluding same-sex marriages, because such marriages are illegal in Japan (and in many countries).

What? These are not real marriages we are talking about. These are pretend marriages between pretend characters. Murder is also illegal in Japan but there are plenty of Japanese video games, television shows, movies, books etc. depicting murder. Ever seen Battle Royale? You want to tell me the that shit is legal in Japan?

Homosexuality, transsexualism and all the other bullshit should be treated just like any other mental disorder.

Actually at least homosexuality is inherited from mother. If someone is gay, there's an elevated chance that his uncle from mother's side is also gay. So apparently it's in the genes, but the exact gene(s) are not known. This is what I have heard.

Nintendo is going to be blasted either way. As a game that is rated for everyone, and as a company that is seen as a children's toy company, if they included it, the latest controversy will be that this toy company is trying to indoctrinate everyone's precious little snowflakes into the homosexual agenda. I'm sure that either Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or and one of the Fox News cadre will call for a boycott of all Nintendo products and all the ignorant middle age assholes that actually give credence to what these people say will be going around with signs saying, "God hates Mario" or whatever. While Nintendo isn't as utterly screwed as the media like to portray it as, that kind of bad publicity would put them into a very bad place.

However, the big problem was that same sex relationships were possible in the Japanese version of the game via what Nintendo calls a "bug." If it was never possible in the first place, it could have been defended as a simple design decision, but by having it possible and getting rid of it, the media is spinning it as some sort of social commentary by Nintendo. So, by fixing the bug, now they are getting the wrath of the LGBT community and are facing the kind of bad publicity that they really don't need right now.

Basically, all this will do is ensure that these kind of social simulators will remain as Japan only.

Which is why, if anything has been learned from the Mozilla Eich fiasco, the lesson should be "always ignore the LGBT community."

They're never worth engaging. Ever. Apologies won't be enough, LGBT-friendly policies won't be another, nothing will be enough once you're in their sights. Despite apologizing, despite pledging not to change Mozilla's LGBT-friendly policies, despite giving in to all of their demands, the LGBT community would not let up and forced him to resign.

Actually, the complaint arised when two people who owned already the game found out they couldn't have their Mii characters marry in the game. But let a fact not spoil your rant. Keep up the good work!

Actually, the complaint arised when two people who owned already the game found out they couldn't have their Mii characters marry in the game. But let a fact not spoil your rant. Keep up the good work!

It's a game. Games are not real life and don't always have to accommodate every single form of relationship. As far as I know without some modification you can't have same sex marriages in Skyrim either. Get over it.

Yes, it's a game. And no one is forced to buy it. And Nintendo is free to market it to a smaller portion of the potential buyership by restricting it artificially. I wouldn't have bought it because of those artificial restictions. And I am straight. And because there are not only LBGTs complaining, but the market just shrank by Nintendo acting inconsiderately, Nintendo made a turnaround and will patch the game in the next release. And now you complain that Nintendo tries to appeal to a buyership you don't l

LGBT is 1% of Nintendo Buyers.And most LGBT people won't care/complain...

So, it'll be 1/10000, 1/20000 or even less (don't forget that Nintendo primary commercial targets are children and Japan where same sex union is illegal) who could decide to not buy the game... unlikely to have any impact to Nintendo profitability...

And if Nintendo decides to implement it, it'll require lots of extra-development as they'll have to comply with local laws of some countries (including their own) where same sex union is f

A large percentage of video games involve killing people, which is generally illegal, often using weapons which would be illegal in the countries the games are sold in (if the laws of physics allowed your BFG-9000 and Death Ray to exist.) Also, a number of countries have laws affecting who can get married, and this game certainly isn't implementing lots of checks on whether you've been married before or are a citizen or whatever.

They went out of their way to write code to disallow same-sex marriage; if th

Because marriage in the game is intended to produce children (note: not applying that to reality at this time, please don't argue that), and having two characters of the same sex breaks the game when it attempts to determine which character is the father and which is the mother.

1 out of 10 people being homosexual is a gross exaggeration. That number includes bisexuals and any heterosexuals who admitted to a survey monkey of having once had a homosexual thought. 9/10 adults are straight to the core, and 9/10 of the 1/10 are 99.9% straight.

If you take recent studies done to correct population sampling (more than 100000 people, randomly selected), you fall under 5% for LGBT (some studies made on more than 500000 people lead to less than 3%)

In most of these studies, Bisexual account usually for half of the people which leads to 1-2% homosexuals...

1:10 where? San Francisco, the United States, the world? I'd like to see an objective source that validates that statistic. I hear people throw it around a lot but I've never seen it verified.

Any organism that actively engages in a behavior that inhibits its ability to reproduce is an anomaly. That's just a basic understanding of how natural selection works. Humans, with our self-reflecting consciousness, have a great tendency to do anomalous things as our behavior is more than mere impulse, so I don't mean it as a disparaging remark. I personally don't want to reproduce because I don't think the human race needs to increase our numbers at this time, and this type of decision makes me an anomaly among organisms.

I can't stand the California attitude that evolution is a hardened fact yet being a homosexual is like being born to a ultra-special race that must be cherished and insulated from anything that might possibly be misconstrued as a slight against their amazing specialness. Do I believe that homosexuals should be discriminated against? No. Do I think they should be able to marry? I don't believe that marriage should be a legal status among straights or homosexuals. Call your partnership with your significant other whatever you want to call it. Do I think that every TV show and movie and video game should have token gay people? No. At a certain point the pursuit of inclusiveness makes a spectacle of those included. It used to be the token black guy who always had something snappy to say. Now it's the token gay guy. I guess next up will be the token tranny.

And I don't know many LGBT people who are thrilled with the idea of the "token" gay character either, because such a character is always played for laughs. I can't tell you who's being pandered to there, but it's sure not us. I value the few instances of deep characters who happen to be gay, just because sometimes people are gay.

For some perspective on whether or not 3.8-5% gets considered to be an anomaly, I have Morton's toe [wikipedia.org], which occurs in about 10% of the population, yet it's still considered an anomaly. If an uncontroversial

I'm not sure where part of the plot hinges on a character's distinctive outfit. Consider the famous overalls in Super Mario RPG or the hero's tunic in pick a Legend of Zelda game. It'd be interesting to hear how you suggest that the developers make the non-player characters react to the player's choice of appearance.

Overract much? Sure, they should've added LGBT stuff in their game (although I'm not quite sure trans can even be represented in a game about Mii avatars...), but I'm pretty sure Nintendo's games have helped a LOT more teenagers (through a way of escaping bad events, or a distraction and way too calm themselves, and so on) than they've hindered. This isn't some sort of conscious campaigning against LGBT, it's an omission. To then imagine how the world would be better without them is both ludicrously harsh a

Gosh, you're so brave, speaking truth about a movement so powerful that...... the majority of states haven't made it legal...... it's still quite legal in many states to discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation or gender presentation...... on a website that has modded up most of the comments AGAINST people speaking out for inclusion...... you're a real fucking hero. Possibly one of the bravest people I've ever come across. Bravely squandering (not really) your Slashdot karma to sa

Try approximately 1% of the population. The wiki here [wikipedia.org] shows 3.8% average but when you look at how they estimate numbers their estimates are grossly incorrect. For example people that express "curiosity" are counted, as are those that may have experimented at some point in time. Here is a quote to show the inaccuracy clearly.

According to the Williams Institute review conducted in April 2011, approximately 3.80 % of American adults identify themselves being in the LBGT community; wherein, (1.70%) identify as lesbian or gay, bisexual (1.80%), and/or transgender (0.30%);

The way they get the 3.8% number is to tally up all of the results, yet there is no control preventing people from answering to multiple categories. Depending on who is running the study, bisexuals may automatically be counted as lesbian or gay. Other studies may ask the questions separately, but a bisexual person would normally respond that they have same sex relationships so are also lesbian or gay. People identifying themselves as transgender are bisexual, gay, or lesbian (don't make the mistake of jumping to circular reasoning on that one) almost all of the time.

Then perhaps they should instead be playing games that don't let player characters get married in the first place. Heterosexual life partnership is likewise a "grown-up issue[] that shouldn't be on a child's mind when he's playing a video game." This rules out a lot of Harvest Moon games, as one of the goals is to make one of the NPCs your waifu.

Good luck getting that to work reliably without privacy advocates lambasting Nintendo for using IPv4 address geolocation, especially on a console that doesn't yet have a credit card linked to eShop. Someone might be buying all games as discs/cartridges or might be using only gift cards with eShop.

Video games don't even have to obey the laws of physics, much less national and local laws. It's nice if they can at least obey the laws of Cartoon Physics consistently, for whatever version of that they choose to implement.

last time I checked it was also illegal to kill people like you do in most other games.

Note that nintendo is primerally a maker of childrens/family games. That means that when considering what to include in a game they not only have to think about whether it will make the game illegal but about what it will do to the age rating of the game in various countries arround the world. They also have to think about what parents will think of it.

Notice how in games for little children you tend to kill monsters instead of people and in games for mid teenagers if you kill people it's in certain situati

Yeah, when I was in my 20s most Hispanics just wanted to work hard to better their families, most women were pretty happy staying in the home once they had kids, most Slashdotters were marginalized geeks who just wanted to play with computers. Now, Hispanics want to be respected as equals in the political arena, women want equal pay for equal work, and Slashdotters want people to stay off their lawns. I definitely really don't approve that ethnic, gender, and social groups who previously stayed in their o